$// Maria M. Ochoa (Lenoir NC) FM CP MM 90-430 FCC 94-337 //$
$/ 1.106 Petitions for Reconsideration /$
$/ 500.3210 Standing /$
///newjob///
$///FCC 94-337 12-30-94///$
Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 22054 FCC 94-337
In re applications of ) MM Docket No. 90-430
)
MARIA M. OCHOA ) File No. BPH-890615ME
)
FOOTHILLS BROADCASTING, INC. ) File No. BPH-890616MR
)
For Construction Permit for a )
new FM station, Channel 277A, )
at Lenoir, North Carolina )
ORDER
Adopted: December 22, 1994; Released: January 6, 1995
By the Commission;
1. This order dismisses as repetitious a Petition for
Reconsideration filed January 27, 1994 by Maria M. Ochoa. In
Maria M. Ochoa, 8 FCC Rcd 3135 (1993), the Commission found that
Ochoa was not qualified to be a licensee and affirmed the Review
Board's denial of her application. 7 FCC Rcd 6569 (Rev. Bd.
1992). Subsequently, the Commission denied a petition for
reconsideration filed by Ochoa, but remanded for further
proceedings concerning the qualifications of Foothills
Broadcasting, Inc. 9 FCC Rcd 56 (1993). Ochoa now seeks
reconsideration of the order denying her previous petition for
reconsideration.
2. Ochoa argues that the Commission erred in relying on a
witness who was biased because Ochoa had caused his salary to be
cut and because he had a close relationship with a competing
applicant. She further asserts that the Commission engaged in a
post hoc rationalization concerning the ALJ's refusal to allow
Ochoa to call a rebuttal witness. Ochoa also contends that the
Commission should consider her arguments because, in light of the
remand proceedings involving Foothills, the time is not yet ripe
for her to appeal her disqualification in this proceeding.
Foothills asserts that Ochoa's principal arguments were
previously considered and rejected by the Commission, and that
Ochoa's second petition for reconsideration should be dismissed.
3. The Commission previously denied a Petition for
Reconsideration filed by Ochoa. Ochoa's instant petition is an
unauthorized pleading which will be dismissed as repetitious
pursuant to 47 C.F.R. 1.106(k)(3). Its current arguments
concern matters that have already been fully considered in the
Commission's decision and order denying reconsideration. 8 FCC
Rcd at 3136-37 11-12, 17 and 9 FCC Rcd at 58 n.4. Ochoa's
procedural argument is also without merit. She has exhausted her
administrative remedies, and the time for appeal is now ripe.
Warren Price Communications, Inc., 7 FCC Rcd 6850 n.1 (1993).
Ochoa also continues to have standing to participate with respect
to the Foothills remand proceedings as long as she pursues her
appellate rights concerning the denial of her application.
4. ACCORDINGLY IT IS ORDERED, That the Petition for
Reconsideration filed January 27, 1994 by Maria M. Ochoa IS
DISMISSED.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
William F. Caton
Acting Secretary